Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
comp.unix.shell
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion execute-only permission
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Andy Walker  
View profile  
 More options Sep 27 2012, 12:28 pm
Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell
From: Andy Walker <n...@cuboid.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 17:28:52 +0100
Local: Thurs, Sep 27 2012 12:28 pm
Subject: Re: execute-only permission
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On 27/09/12 09:52, mc wrote:

> I need to let "other people" access a single file in read-only mode.
> I need to set the permission of a directories branch in order to avoid
> the listing of the contens of any directory.

        Something to consider is to have a "shares" directory,
specifically for this purpose [so it can be protected as much
or as little as you like] containing hard links to any files
you want to make available:  "ln my/project/file $HOME/shares".
Then you just tell people to look in your "shares" directory.

Pro:  There is no need to allow any access at all to the project
   area, and indeed the project can be moved or rearranged without
   having to tell anyone.  There is no clue in the linkage as to
   where the [rest of] the project is.
Con:  Hard links have to be on the same filesystem.  Some editing
    and back-up tools and similar are quite cavalier about whether
    edits are applied to the original file or to a copy [which means
   that the linkage is lost and you have to re-instate it].  If
   you have several or many "single files", then you have to be
   careful about name collisions.

Symbolic links ["ln -s ..."] could be used instead, with somewhat
different pros and cons.

--
Andy Walker,
Nottingham.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google